 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Mac Applications / May 2007BBEdit buttons: Cool!!
I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", "Save") is on screen; press and hold the Cmd key; several of the buttons expand to show their keyboard equivalents -- ("Don't Save Apple-D", etc.). That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? You've just never noticed it before. > > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? Multiple replies to this message seem to indicate that the idea (meaning by "the idea", expanding each button's text to show its keyboard equivalent) goes way back, and is implemented elsewhere. But it's not -- so far as I can see -- employed in the Finder or other OS X dialog boxes . . . ? (Or is there some preference setting I've missed?) > But it's not -- so far as I can see -- employed in the Finder or > other OS X dialog boxes . . . ? (Or is there some preference setting > I've missed?) The idea is, but the display is not.  SignatureSupport the troops: Bring them home ASAP. >>> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in >>> BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > OS X dialog boxes . . . ? (Or is there some preference setting I've > missed?) Mac OS X isn't "way back" - we're talking way back in classic Mac OS. SignatureJR > >>> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > >>> BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Mac OS X isn't "way back" - we're talking way back in classic Mac OS. And it wasn't there either. I've been using Macs since the Plus shipped, and have since then used every shipping version of the OS. It wasn't a standard behavior and it wasn't particularly common either. Being _able_ to invoke buttons (other than the standard okay and cancel shortcuts) was quite a bit more common. But not dynamically showing and hiding the keystrokes on the buttons. >>> Multiple replies to this message seem to indicate that the idea (meaning >>> by "the idea", expanding each button's text to show its keyboard [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > And it wasn't there either. It wasn't implemented elsewhere in classic Mac OS? Yes, of course it was. (Or do you mean it wasn't employed in the Finder or other OS dialog boxes? That's true - but then I don't think anyone ever said it was). > I've been using Macs since the Plus shipped, > and have since then used every shipping version of the OS. It wasn't a > standard behavior and it wasn't particularly common either. I don't think anyone has suggested it was a standard behavior. It existed in at least several popular applications, and was certainly common enough that lots of people who have used Macs just as long as yourself remember it. > Being _able_ to invoke buttons (other than the standard okay and cancel > shortcuts) was quite a bit more common. But not dynamically showing and > hiding the keystrokes on the buttons. Does it really matter exactly how common it was? At any rate, I remember it in QuicKeys and BBEdit for sure. I recall it being implemented in a couple other applications back then as well, although I can't seem to remember which particular applications. I also seem to remember there was a system extension / custom CDEF that did it too. SignatureJR > >>> Multiple replies to this message seem to indicate that the idea (meaning > >>> by "the idea", expanding each button's text to show its keyboard [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > It wasn't implemented elsewhere in classic Mac OS? Yes, of course it was. Tricky phrasing. It wasn't implemented "in the OS." It was implemented in some programs that ran under that OS. > > I've been using Macs since the Plus shipped, > > and have since then used every shipping version of the OS. It wasn't a > > standard behavior and it wasn't particularly common either. > > I don't think anyone has suggested it was a standard behavior. "A lot of applications did this back in classic Mac OS, so much so that a kind of standard was created" "It's a very old Mac thing." "I seem to recall that was standard behaviour across most (all?) apps in ye olde pre OS X days." It's comments like those that I was addressing. "A lot" and "Mac thing" and "standard behaviour" suggest a situation fairly different from reality. > It existed in at least several popular applications, and was certainly > common enough that lots of people who have used Macs just as long as > yourself remember it. Ah, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was common. It could just as easily mean that it was uncommon and thus that its appearance (especially in such seminal apps as BBEdit) was noteworthy. Mind you, I'm not asserting that it didn't exist or implying by these last comments that I think there's anything wrong with it. Just that, as I noted, some of the responses gave something of a false impression. G Guys, I don't want to get involved in the discussion/squabble over past history -- although some of those posts have been very interesting -- but rather focus on what a remarkably _good_ and effective GUI idea it is to have dialog box buttons expand on a _transient_ basis to display their keyboard equivalent when the command key is held down. * It's exceptionally helpful and useful to the novice or infrequent user -- a kind of instant, totally focused, totally relevant, context sensitive "Help" message (and educational tool) (or reminder tool), with no interruption of work flow or having to start up and search in some Help application. * Yet it's totally out of the way for power users who don't need it. So: * So, what other sorts of interface elements could apply some variation or extension of this basic concept? (We're of course all aware of one such example, namely menus that change the menu commands and keyboard equivalents they display if you press the Option or Ctrl keys while the menu is down -- but are there others?) * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other parts of its basic interface? [Beyond the menu example just cited] > * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on > Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other > parts of its basic interface? [Beyond the menu example just cited] I suppose it's quite possible Apple dislikes the idea of cluttering a button's name with symbols and the like. SignatureJR > > * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on > > Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other > > parts of its basic interface? [Beyond the menu example just cited] > > I suppose it's quite possible Apple dislikes the idea of cluttering a > button's name with symbols and the like. Look, the "idea", as already defined multiple times in this thread, is that the keyboard equivalent (or any other symbol, or useful help information) should only appear if and after the user presses and holds the Cmd key for a moment, >>> * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on >>> Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > information) should only appear if and after the user presses and holds > the Cmd key for a moment, Yes, I am quite capable of understanding the functionality - thanks. I still say it's quite possible Apple dislikes the idea of cluttering a button's name with symbols and the like. SignatureJR > >>> * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on > >>> Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > still say it's quite possible Apple dislikes the idea of cluttering a > button's name with symbols and the like. You mean someone or a group at Apple looked at it and said "Oh no, even though it is obviously quite useful and does not appear unless the user _wants_ it to appear, we don't like the look of our precious buttons having more symbols in them?" Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-B52659.09463527052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > > >>> * And why hasn't Apple -- one of the most GUI-focused companies on > > >>> Earth -- adopted this idea much more widely in the Finder, and other [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > unless the user _wants_ it to appear, we don't like the look of > our precious buttons having more symbols in them?" You think that's unlikely? Study the history of design, marketing and power at Apple and you'll realize it's quite a plausible scenario. In article <260520071753422923%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, > > You mean someone or a group at Apple looked at it and said "Oh > > no, even though it is obviously quite useful and does not appear [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You think that's unlikely? Study the history of design, marketing and > power at Apple and you'll realize it's quite a plausible scenario. It is not at all plausible that a user operated command that would give an extra apple keyboard command symbol and a letter key would provoke such a reaction. But I do take your point that it can be a bit surprising what people or groups in control of software can think. Signaturedorayme > In article > <260520071753422923%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > would give an extra apple keyboard command symbol and a letter > key would provoke such a reaction. Take it from a software developer - it's perfectly plausible. SignatureJR > > In article > > <260520071753422923%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Take it from a software developer - it's perfectly plausible. It is not as perfectly plausible in this particular case as that they could not be bothered or did not have it in mind at all at the time. Signaturedorayme >>> In article >>> <260520071753422923%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > they could not be bothered or did not have it in mind at all at > the time. Yes, yes its perfectly plausible that Apple made a decision not to implement it for a variety of potential stylistic reasons. I've worked for various software companies for many years. You can take my word for it, or not. SignatureJR > >> Take it from a software developer - it's perfectly plausible. > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > for various software companies for many years. You can take my word > for it, or not. I pictured this. An apple engineer thinks of this fantastically useful feature. It is dead simple to implement. But he does not like the look of an apple command symbol and a letter appearing on a button when the command key is pressed by the user. Plain and simple as that. He simply does not like the look of it and was so opinionated that the rich benefits to the users counted for nothing by comparison. But you are now introducing vague ideas like "Apple made a decision not to implement it for a variety of potential stylistic reasons" and so I will, for peace, now give up before the gang start getting restless and piling in on me like crude rugger boys in a scrum. I can feel them itching to have a go at me. You do realise that being hunted by packs is not exactly something I enjoy as an every day activity. Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-803CA4.15091227052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > > >> Take it from a software developer - it's perfectly plausible. > > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > was so opinionated that the rich benefits to the users counted > for nothing by comparison. In general, single engineers do not have the latitude to make decisions like that. G > In article > <doraymeRidThis-803CA4.15091227052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > G Right, picture then the more absurd, not less, absurd situation of a group of people coming to this unlikely conclusion. Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-F75DB8.08202428052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > > In article > > <doraymeRidThis-803CA4.15091227052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Right, picture then the more absurd, not less, absurd situation > of a group of people coming to this unlikely conclusion. I've seen far more absurd decisions come out of a committee. > I've seen far more absurd decisions come out of a committee. A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain. --Robert A. Heinlein > > Right, picture then the more absurd, not less, absurd situation > > of a group of people coming to this unlikely conclusion. > > I've seen far more absurd decisions come out of a committee. In one objection to the design argument for the existence of God, I have heard it said that, considering all the faults in the world, it looked like it was made by a committee rather than an individual. Signaturedorayme >>>> Take it from a software developer - it's perfectly plausible. >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > was so opinionated that the rich benefits to the users counted > for nothing by comparison. Usually it's more like this: engineers like the feature and don't give a rat's a.s about style (or simply aren't aware of the stylistic issues surrounding it), so they implement it or make a proof of concept. Then at some point before release, some higher-up sees it or gets wind of it, runs it by the "style guru", whoever that may be at the time, who rejects it and the feature is removed. SignatureJR > > I pictured this. An apple engineer thinks of this fantastically > > useful feature. It is dead simple to implement. But he does not [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > it, runs it by the "style guru", whoever that may be at the time, who > rejects it and the feature is removed. Yes, ok, this is more like it, Jolly Roger! I would not rule this out. But being as it is something that appears on special command and it not being so bad visually anyway, I doubt what you are saying. I am not saying you are definitely wrong. Just that on this occasion I would wager and I am no gambler. Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-A65CE3.08241428052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > > > I pictured this. An apple engineer thinks of this fantastically > > > useful feature. It is dead simple to implement. But he does not [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > saying. I am not saying you are definitely wrong. Just that on > this occasion I would wager and I am no gambler. A simple web search will reveal many essays by people who actually worked at Apple doing just this sort of thing. Read them. In article <270520071652075183%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, > In article > <doraymeRidThis-A65CE3.08241428052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > > Yes, ok, this is more like it, Jolly Roger! I would not rule this > > out. But being as it is something that appears on special command [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > A simple web search will reveal many essays by people who actually > worked at Apple doing just this sort of thing. Read them. A simple web search would reveal this? And not for for a very wide value of "such thing"? I was really focussed on this command show keyboard strokes thing, you might be surprised how much I might otherwise agree with you. Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-F53190.11500728052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > In article > <270520071652075183%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > show keyboard strokes thing, you might be surprised how much I > might otherwise agree with you. I could post a screenshot for you... In article <270520072034278886%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>, > > > A simple web search will reveal many essays by people who actually > > > worked at Apple doing just this sort of thing. Read them. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I could post a screenshot for you... Now whatever gave you the idea to do that, I wonder? Signaturedorayme In article <doraymeRidThis-803CA4.15091227052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, > I pictured this. An apple engineer thinks of this fantastically > useful feature. It is dead simple to implement. But he does not like [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > opinionated that the rich benefits to the users counted for nothing > by comparison. He really doesn't have a say in the matter; the Human Interface Group people get to decide whether to implement things like this. The engineers then get to figure out how to implement them. Apple does do extensive human interface design research and testing, and apparently one of two things happened with this particular feature. 1. HIG testing showed that it is not a good idea 2. Steve Jobs said it is not a good idea. (or both) SignatureSupport the troops: Bring them home ASAP. > In article > <doraymeRidThis-803CA4.15091227052007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > (or both) I accept this. But see my last post. Signaturedorayme >>>>> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in >>>>> BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > shortcuts) was quite a bit more common. But not dynamically showing and > hiding the keystrokes on the buttons. Yes, I remember using bbedit in OS9 and earlier, and being surprised by the appearence of the shortcuts when I pressed command. Andy > Being _able_ to invoke buttons (other than the standard okay and > cancel shortcuts) was quite a bit more common. But not dynamically > showing and hiding the keystrokes on the buttons. If I recall correctly, MacWrite Pro could do that back in 1993. SignatureSupport the troops: Bring them home ASAP. > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? Yeah I kind of liked that too, though I don't think BBEdit *invented* it. A lot of applications did this back in classic Mac OS, so much so that a kind of standard was created (Command-D for Don't Save, Command-S for Save, etc.) and a lot of applications, even today, allow you to type those shortcuts (most of Adobe's Mac applications, for example) even if they don't display the shortcuts in the buttons themselves. SignatureJR > > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Yeah I kind of liked that too, though I don't think BBEdit *invented* > it. It's been a very long time :-) but my recollection is of seeing a prototypical form of the behavior in CE Software's products (might have been QuicKeys or QuickMail) in 1989, and thinking that it was interesting but that showing the button title along with the keyboard equivalent was a useful refinement. (QuickMail just toggled between the button title and the keyboard equivalent.) At the time I was working at THINK, and I _believe_ that I prototyped the feature in what became BBEdit and it made its way into THINK C and THINK Pascal, but again, it was a very long time ago so don't hold me to that order of events. :-) Either way, since 90% of Mac developers were using a THINK product to do their work, a lot of people were exposed to the feature. And I'm sure that more than a few came up with it independently. :-) R. SignatureRich Siegel <siegel@spamcop.net> Bare Bones Software, Inc. <http://www.barebones.com/> Someday I'll look back on all this and laugh... until they sedate me. >>> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in >>> BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > equivalent was a useful refinement. (QuickMail just toggled between the > button title and the keyboard equivalent.) (Hi Rich! Cool that you frequent this news group. We met at WWDC in San Francisco and exchanged t-shirts once. I still have that T-shirt in the closet - it's one of my favorites. : ) Nice to know you are still alive and well. Anyway...) Yes! I think that's where I remember seeing it first in QuicKeys. I'm pretty sure you nailed that one on the head. > At the time I was working at THINK, and I _believe_ that I prototyped > the feature in what became BBEdit and it made its way into THINK C and > THINK Pascal, I practically *lived* in THINK Pascal for a few years back then, and I'm pretty sure I remember it there as well now that I think back. > but again, it was a very long time ago so don't hold me to > that order of events. :-) Either way, since 90% of Mac developers were > using a THINK product to do their work, a lot of people were exposed to > the feature. And I'm sure that more than a few came up with it > independently. :-) Oh I bet. It was all over the place back then. I seem to recall an extension that did it as well, although I could be wrong about that. Anyway, while it's good that a lot of applications in Mac OS X implement the shortcuts, only a few here and there actually *display* the shortcuts when you press the Command key. I think that's a shame. Good for you for keeping it in BBEdit in Mac OS X! SignatureJR > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? It's a very old Mac thing. My only complaint about the BBEdit implementation is that in the Find dialogue you can't see the keyboard equivalents for "Find All" and "Replace All" when you hold down the command key. It's cmd-opt-F and cmd-opt-R respectively. BTW The best keyboard short-cuts system by miles on any computer are those by Nisus as used in Nisus Writer classic and Nisus Writer Pro. The way it works is that you can use letters/numbers in a series. So for example to create a new file you can have command-N-E-W, you hold down the command key and type N, then E, the W as if your were typing "NEW" as a word. With the Nisus system you can have hundreds of keyboard short-cuts and they are all extremely memorable. If Steve Jobs got the Nisus keyboard short-cuts system built into OS X it would have been extremely cool indeed. SignaturePatrick - Brighton, UK If you wish email me from my web-site: <http://www.patrickjames.me.uk> Inventory service in Sussex: <http://www.inventoryworks.co.uk> > > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick > > in BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > down the command key and type N, then E, the W as if your were typing > "NEW" as a word. And this is superior to Cmd-N in what way? > With the Nisus system you can have hundreds of keyboard short-cuts > and they are all extremely memorable. > > If Steve Jobs got the Nisus keyboard short-cuts system built into OS > X it would have been extremely cool indeed. Sounds like it would have resulted in a lot of unnecessary typing. >>> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick >>> in BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > And this is superior to Cmd-N in what way? Because of what I wrote next: >> With the Nisus system you can have hundreds of keyboard short-cuts >> and they are all extremely memorable. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Sounds like it would have resulted in a lot of unnecessary typing. It's fabulous. You can download Nisus Writer Pro if you like and try it out. SignaturePatrick - Brighton, UK If you wish email me from my web-site: <http://www.patrickjames.me.uk> Inventory service in Sussex: <http://www.inventoryworks.co.uk> > BTW The best keyboard short-cuts system by miles on any computer are those > by Nisus as used in Nisus Writer classic and Nisus Writer Pro. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > If Steve Jobs got the Nisus keyboard short-cuts system built into OS X it > would have been extremely cool indeed. Surely those have been patented by now! :) > Surely those have been patented by now! :) Oh god - don't give anyone ideas... SignatureJR > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? I seem to recall that was standard behaviour across most (all?) apps in ye olde pre OS X days. I can't claim to have used the feature on a regular basis. SignatureAdrian > > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > ye olde pre OS X days. I can't claim to have used the feature on a > regular basis. It's fairly standard post-OS X, as well. I'm used to hitting command-D for 'don't save' on save/don't save/cancel dialogs, for instance. It's built into AppKit, so lots of software gets this behavior 'for free' from Apple. Signaturehttp://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2007/070416_argument.html > > > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > > > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > built into AppKit, so lots of software gets this behavior 'for free' > from Apple. Shortcut keys for "basic" dialog buttons are pretty much universal - esc/cmd-. for cancel, and <return> for OK/accept/do it/proceed as planned (the "default" button) have been around pretty much forever. cmd-d for "don't save" is a bit more recent, but still pretty widespread. Several others are common, as well, but I think what the OP was impressed with was more the "hit command, watch the button label text change from <normal button text> to <The shortcut for this button is...> concept - A behavior I only recall seeing in BBEdit, though I'm sure that it exists in other apps. SignatureDon Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist, or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow" somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's really helpful! Is it a special BBEdit invention, or something > that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it before? That feature is also there in TextWrangler. SignaturePaul Sture >> I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in >> BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That feature is also there in TextWrangler. Well that makes sense - they are made by the same company. : ) SignatureJR > I just noticed for the first time a really cool interface gimmick in > BBEdit: A dialog box with several bottons ("Don't Save", "Cancel", [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > something that's more widely used, and I've just never noticed it > before? It's pretty standard, although some (many?) applications don't change the display, the functionality is still there. SignatureSupport the troops: Bring them home ASAP. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.